Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Who gets cut that suddenly leaves us with a big need?


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#46 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 23,641 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:45 PM

I'm not a GM but from my understanding, there is no restructuring or cutting Beason. He either has to be traded or play under his contract as is.


I think you could cut him....but you are looking big picture with the cut and not just for the 2013 season ( I think most look at just the upcoming year and impact)

I think Beason is untradeable currently

#47 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:09 PM

I think you could cut him....but you are looking big picture with the cut and not just for the 2013 season ( I think most look at just the upcoming year and impact)

I think Beason is untradeable currently


If we cut Beason we save little. 3.75 million of his 2013 contract is guaranteed and his signing bonus even as a June 1st cut would be 4 million this year and 8 million in dead cap space next year. So he costs us 7.75 million this year and 8 million next year if we cut him. If we keep him it costs us 9.5 million this year and 10.75 next year. Honestly I would think he is worth keeping him for 2 years when the difference between cutting and keeping him is roughly 2 million a year. Cutting him won't even make it worth it until 2015 at the earliest. If you cut him in 2015 as a June 1st you lose 2 mil in 2015 and 2 million in 2016. That would be certainly do-able. There is the possibility he will return to form or at least be worth the 2 mil a year difference over the next 2 years.
If we trade him we would still be on the hook for 12 million in dead cap space over 2 years and probably the guaranteed 3.75 million. Can't cut or trade him really.

#48 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:20 PM

If we cut Beason we save little. 3.75 million of his 2013 contract is guaranteed and his signing bonus even as a June 1st cut would be 4 million this year and 8 million in dead cap space next year. So he costs us 7.75 million this year and 8 million next year if we cut him. If we keep him it costs us 9.5 million this year and 10.75 next year. Honestly I would think he is worth keeping him for 2 years when the difference between cutting and keeping him is roughly 2 million a year. Cutting him won't even make it worth it until 2015 at the earliest. If you cut him in 2015 as a June 1st you lose 2 mil in 2015 and 2 million in 2016. That would be certainly do-able. There is the possibility he will return to form or at least be worth the 2 mil a year difference over the next 2 years.
If we trade him we would still be on the hook for 12 million in dead cap space over 2 years and probably the guaranteed 3.75 million. Can't cut or trade him really.


Interesting. I read somewhere that his full salary was guaranteed for injury but maybe it's only 3.75. If traded his salary would be paid by the new team. Cap wise we would only be on the hook for the remaining prorated bonus hit.

I still say he's tradable, maybe a 2014 7th?

But if you can't trade him then I agree keep him on the team.

#49 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,044 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:21 PM

I don't know how anybody can justify cutting our best tackle, when there are other holes along the line that need to be filled.

I certainly feel they should draft a tackle, but if ya cut gross, we'd have to come up with restarting tackles. That's a hole I don't know see any GM digging.

Gamble is the easiest to cut.
After that, the there isn't a whole lot you can cut that will actually help the Panthers cap space. Restructuring would be next. Not all the guys will restructure either. Get three, maybe four to restructure, and the Panthers will be under the cap.

March can't get here soon enough.

#50 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:27 PM

Interesting. I read somewhere that his full salary was guaranteed for injury but maybe it's only 3.75. If traded his salary would be paid by the new team. Cap wise we would only be on the hook for the remaining prorated bonus hit.

I still say he's tradable, maybe a 2014 7th?

But if you can't trade him then I agree keep him on the team.

Again you think that 12 million in dead cap space over the next 2 years makes him tradeable.

#51 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:29 PM

I don't know how anybody can justify cutting our best tackle, when there are other holes along the line that need to be filled.

I certainly feel they should draft a tackle, but if ya cut gross, we'd have to come up with restarting tackles. That's a hole I don't know see any GM digging.

Gamble is the easiest to cut.
After that, the there isn't a whole lot you can cut that will actually help the Panthers cap space. Restructuring would be next. Not all the guys will restructure either. Get three, maybe four to restructure, and the Panthers will be under the cap.

March can't get here soon enough.


Restructuring doesn't do much but shift more cap cost to later years. If the cap stays flat it just makes things worst in a year or two.

#52 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:43 PM

Again you think that 12 million in dead cap space over the next 2 years makes him tradeable.


Ah gotcha. Untradable from a Panthers stand point. Uh yeah. Richardson gave that much to Delhomme to leave. I thinks it's better to go ahead and fix a mistake now than wait until later when it's still going to hurt. And 12 million in dead cap space is better than $20 million towards a SLB.

Buts that just my opinion. Who the hell know what Gettleman thinks.

#53 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:46 PM

Restructuring doesn't do much but shift more cap cost to later years. If the cap stays flat it just makes things worst in a year or two.


Gross would be extended and restructured. That way it would free up a lot of space. Restructuring alone wouldn't help.

#54 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:51 PM

Gross would be extended and restructured. That way it would free up a lot of space. Restructuring alone wouldn't help.

Why would you extend a guy who is already going to be 33 in July. He is already starting to decline and it is likely that will accelerate.

#55 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 23,641 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:54 PM

Again you think that 12 million in dead cap space over the next 2 years makes him tradeable.

I think the fact he is the highest paid MLB in the NFL and has been on IR almost the entire past two seasons.....makes him untradeable. What teams wants to take that on? LB isn't worth the gamble

#56 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:56 PM

Ah gotcha. Untradable from a Panthers stand point. Uh yeah. Richardson gave that much to Delhomme to leave. I thinks it's better to go ahead and fix a mistake now than wait until later when it's still going to hurt. And 12 million in dead cap space is better than $20 million towards a SLB.

Buts that just my opinion. Who the hell know what Gettleman thinks.


If you count the cost of replacing him with a decent option even at 3 million a year you spend 12 million in dead cap space and 6 million for his replacement or 18 million instead of paying Beason the 20 million he would get. People forget that he was an all-pro guy and moving him to play on one side or the other should improve him given that he will less space to cover and his issue is speed. He could return to 85 to 90% of his old form and be well worth keeping.

#57 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,106 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:58 PM

I think the fact he is the highest paid MLB in the NFL and has been on IR almost the entire past two seasons.....makes him untradeable. What teams wants to take that on? LB isn't worth the gamble

If you could pick up Beason for a few million a year it would be well worth it. He would be very tradeable to someone else. The problem is that we still get screwed. This is very much like Demeco Ryans with Houston who the Eagles jumped on.

#58 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 23,641 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:06 PM

If you could pick up Beason for a few million a year it would be well worth it. He would be very tradeable to someone else. The problem is that we still get screwed. This is very much like Demeco Ryans with Houston who the Eagles jumped on.



Ryans cambeack from his ACL and played a 16 game season before he was traded. He had a years worth of his comeback in the books.

Beason came back and was horrible...and went right back to IR.

So I still don't see how the rest of Beason contract is appealing to a team considering his recent history

#59 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:14 PM

Why would you extend a guy who is already going to be 33 in July. He is already starting to decline and it is likely that will accelerate.


He's declining not done. A lot of lineman play until they are 36 or 37. He'll be a place holder for the next LT and then move to RT.

Now in saying this I'm not talking about a Hurney extension. You don't break the bank to extend him as a LT. You extend him paying him as a RT. He may not go for that but I feel Gross wants to retire a Panther and is smart enough to understand the business.

#60 mountainpantherfan2

mountainpantherfan2

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:20 PM

Of all the players Beason is the most complicated. He is the one player I really don't know what will happen. You another team trade for him? Would Gettleman sit on 12 million in dead space over 2 years? Can he even come back and if so will he do it as a SLB or be good at that spot?

A lot of questions that have completely no known answers. Even the details of the contract aren't known publicly so who knows.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.