Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Salary Cap


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,713 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:19 PM

This may have been posted before. If it has it obviously needs a second run because of all the cap and trade questions going around.

By Andrew Brandt | ESPN.com

Financial pain



Another impediment to trading is financial.


Upon a trade, a player's contract is assigned, meaning that the new team will assume the remaining weeks of the current year's salary and any other future commitments on the contract. There may be situations, as with the trade of The Golden Calf of Bristol from the Broncos to the Jets, where there are additional financial commitments beyond salary. The Jets, as part of the trade negotiation, agreed to pay the Broncos $1.5 million this year and $1.03 million next year in assuming portions of salary advance the Broncos paid The Golden Calf of Bristol per the conditions of his rookie contract.


As for salary cap consequences, the unamortized portion of a traded player's contract will be charged to the team's cap the following season. For example, were the Panthers' DeAngelo Williams traded before Thursday afternoon, the remaining unamortized portion of his $16 million signing bonus -- $9.6 million -- would be charged against the Panthers' already-bloated 2013 cap. In other words, the Williams contract, with $21 million guaranteed, would be the gift that keeps on giving.


Although the ability to push off cap consequences to the subsequent year may be seen as helpful because it provides short-term relief in deleting the player's salary, it can present long-term pain. More and more NFL teams are moving to a more cautious "pay as you go" cap strategy rather than mortgaging the present to add future charges. And the 2013 cap is projected to be relatively flat compared to this year.


The entire article can be read here.

http://espn.go.com/n...back-nfl-trades


Pat is not popular around here but here is what he had to say.


By Pat Yasinskas | ESPN.com

Carolina Panthers[/url], and it sure looks like they’re in a much worse situation than the Saints. There simply aren’t a lot of easy escape routes for the Panthers.

I don’t know if former general manager Marty Hurney deserves all the blame or if he was acting on orders from above, but the contracts given to guys like DeAngelo Williams, Jonathan Stewart, Steve Smith, Jon Beason, James Anderson and Charles Godfrey in recent years have left the Panthers in a real salary-cap mess.

Whoever ends up as the new general manager is going to have his hands tied in a lot of ways, because most of those contracts include so much guaranteed in base salaries and so much pro-rated money that it’s difficult, if not impossible, to get out from under some of the team’s biggest contracts by releasing players.

The Panthers would lose cap space if they released Smith, Stewart or Godfrey. They’d basically break even on Anderson.

Beason and Williams could be candidates for release, but only if the Panthers designated them as June 1 cuts and spread their cap hit over two years, instead of one.

The Panthers currently have $136 million committed toward a 2013 salary cap that is expected to be slightly more than $120 million. Let’s look at some guys who could be on the cap bubble.

Beason: The logical scenario for him is a contract restructure to knock his cap figure down. Beason currently has a $9.5 million cap figure and $3.75 million of his $5.25 base salary for this year is guaranteed. Beason also has $12 million in outstanding pro-rated money.

Williams: He has an $8.2 cap figure. He also has $9.6 million in outstanding pro-rated money. They only way the Panthers would benefit from releasing him would be to designate him as a June 1 cut and take a $4.8 million hit for him this year and the same in 2014.

Chris Gamble: It’s sad to say, but the Panthers almost have to cut their best cornerback, because he can provide more cap relief than anyone on the roster. Gamble has a $10.9 million cap figure. The Panthers could free up $7.9 million by releasing him.

Jordan Gross: The Panthers could clear up $6.7 million by releasing him, but I don’t think that’s practical. Do you really want to leave Cam Newton without a left tackle to protect his blind side. Good left tackles usually don’t hit the free-agent market, and the Panthers have too many other needs to use their first draft pick on a left tackle. They can restructure Gross and knock his $11.7 million cap figure down a good bit.

Ron Edwards: The aging and often-injured defensive tackle almost certainly will be gone. The Panthers instantly would clear $2.5 million by releasing him.

Jimmy Clausen: A lot of people assume the third-string quarterback will be gone. But there is no cap space to be gained by releasing Clausen, because his base salary ($575,000) is guaranteed and he still has $322,500 in pro-rated money. Besides, backup Derek Anderson is scheduled to become a free agent. The Panthers aren’t going to have the room to re-sign him. They might as well keep Clausen and bump him up to No. 2 on the depth chart.

Haruki Nakamura: The Panthers signed him as a free agent in 2012, and Nakamaura didn’t really work out. The Panthers could free up $1.8 million by releasing him.

The bottom line here is the Panthers are in a brutal spot. They're not going to be able to do much of anything to improve themselves in free agency. They're going to be subtracting from their roster, and the only viable way to add to it will be through the draft.]


http://espn.go.com/b...e-cap-situation


Dont know about you guys but I'm not gonna get my hopes up for FA

#2 Keith Moons Liver

Keith Moons Liver

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,589 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:22 PM

They might as well keep Clausen and bump him up to No. 2 on the depth chart.


Fixing the o-line has never been more important. Cam must be protected.

#3 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,625 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:25 PM

We have this conversation every year.

Every year we wind up ok.

I don't see this season as an exception.

#4 carpantherfan84

carpantherfan84

    Abductive Reasoner

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,713 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:28 PM

Maybe the fact that we have this conversation every year is the problem. Cap problems are not a necessary evil in the NFL. Especially if you are not winning or sending people to the Probowl often. With our record and talent rating we should be well under the cap.

#5 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,493 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:36 PM

Cap problems? We don't have to worry about that!


Posted Image

#6 Argus Plexus

Argus Plexus

    Super Kami Guru

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,721 posts
  • LocationCape Fear Area

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:37 PM

A shiver went down my spine when I read the Jimmy being no.2 part.

#7 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,029 posts
  • LocationIn yo moma

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:56 PM

Those contracts are that bad considering after they get paid off if beason and Williams leave they will only get a couple mill a year for their remaining years from other teams so it will make sense for them to restructure and make around 4 and 5 for the next 6 or 7 years. My opinion since I don't know much but I know both are like old cars now and they are a depreciating asset. So now I'm not worried that much.

#8 Gabeking

Gabeking

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:58 PM

We have this conversation every year.

Every year we wind up ok.

I don't see this season as an exception.


But if master Patrick said it then it MUST be true!!!11!!1!

#9 Gabeking

Gabeking

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:00 AM

Those contracts are that bad considering after they get paid off if beason and Williams leave they will only get a couple mill a year for their remaining years from other teams so it will make sense for them to restructure and make around 4 and 5 for the next 6 or 7 years. My opinion since I don't know much but I know both are like old cars now and they are a depreciating asset. So now I'm not worried that much.


They're that bad cuz beason got injured and chud is completely misutilizing Williams.

#10 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,640 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:18 AM

They're that bad cuz beason got injured and chud is completely misutilizing Williams.


Maybe Chud doesn't use Williams right.....but that doesn't change the fact we are paying too much at RB.

We paid 2 RBs BIG money....then have Tolbert and Cam is the best rusher on the team. Even if Williams was used right....he shouldn't be on the roster. Too many highly paid RBs...that money should of been invested elsewhere ( his or Stewarts)

#11 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,029 posts
  • LocationIn yo moma

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:19 AM

Yeah, Beason was injured and that's why his stock has fallen which means if he opts to take his guaranteed money and leave, he will be lucky to make 2 mill a year.

As for Deangelo, I don't see him making more than 2-3 mill a year if he decides to leave so he has more incentive to stay. I think Chud has learned his lesson and rr looked dumbfounded during the huddle when mixon or Robinson pointed out that deangelo still has it so for some reason I don't see williams being demoted anymore.

jmo




#12 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,640 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:22 AM

Yeah, Beason was injured and that's why his stock has fallen which means if he opts to take his guaranteed money and leave, he will be lucky to make 2 mill a year.

As for Deangelo, I don't see him making more than 2-3 mill a year if he decides to leave so he has more incentive to stay. I think Chud has learned his lesson and rr looked dumbfounded during the huddle when mixon or Robinson pointed out that deangelo still has it so for some reason I don't see williams being demoted anymore.

jmo

Was that your opinion prior to the last game of the season? One game shouldn't drastically change Williams' fate.

Williams has little reason to restructure....nor does Carolina have much of one. You don't throw big cash in a restructure at a 30 yr old RB....THAT creates more of the same issues we are faced with now

#13 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,029 posts
  • LocationIn yo moma

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:28 AM

Ive been pulling for Williams all season and my twitter account proves that. So you would rather pay out close 5 mill a year for nothing instead of keeping him for 5 mill a year? If you say yeah then you are a troll, if you think Stewart can carry the.team then you wish death upon our constant play off hopes.

#14 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,493 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:35 AM

While we're talking about the cap, everyone needs to keep in mind that we have to be in compliance with the cap in March. So when we talk about June 1st cuts or trades, keep in mind they won't do us any good in the short term. We are going to have to get under the cap long before June 1st.

#15 Gabeking

Gabeking

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,336 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:37 AM

Maybe Chud doesn't use Williams right.....but that doesn't change the fact we are paying too much at RB.

We paid 2 RBs BIG money....then have Tolbert and Cam is the best rusher on the team. Even if Williams was used right....he shouldn't be on the roster. Too many highly paid RBs...that money should of been invested elsewhere ( his or Stewarts)


If deangelo was used correctly, nobody would be complaining....

And about this salary cap hooplah this poo happens with us every year and we somehow ALWAYS turn out ok, I'm not saying we won't cut or trade a few vets (even d-will or beason, if need be, although I hope not) and that we won't be limited in FA obviously but the overreaction that happens every year about this is ridiculous IMO..


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com