Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

We Have To Find A Way To Keep Beast and Gamble


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#31 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

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

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:07 PM

You never hear analyst talking about getting under cap to free up draftees.

#32 GoCarolina8990

GoCarolina8990

    All Day

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,616 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:13 PM

If we can save as much as people say we can by cutting/trading Gamble/Gross/Beason we need to do it. Top 10 Defense without Gamble and Beason. Beason cant even do what he does best on this team...if he restructures though I wont complain.

Gamble on the other hand has some very good football left in him and he wont restructure. As much as it would be nice to keep Gamble that money could go to other needs on this team, for cheaper. One thing I heard by Gettleman that is a good thing is that he knows you can get good players for CHEAP. He mentioned Martellus Bennett, what a steal. Jermichael Finley could be someone he targets with some free'd up cash, for CHEAP

#33 Rubi

Rubi

    Squid Smasher

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,302 posts
  • LocationCharlotte

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:18 PM

If I were a player I would NOT take a pay cut. It wouldn't be my problem if they cant keep the financials in order.

But as a fan...again just another big shout out to Hurney for the cap hell

#34 Pimpdaddy

Pimpdaddy

    takin it as it comes

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,871 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:18 PM

...stupid....keep us in mediocrity...

#35 CardiacCats

CardiacCats

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,384 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 06:21 PM

No we don't. Neither are that important anynore

#36 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,480 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:05 PM

the draft comes from a different cap space and isn't included, I believe.


That is not correct. They are part of the same salary cap.

Here's how it works...draft picks are counted at the rookie minimum until they sign a contract. And for most of the offseason, only the top 51 players count against the cap. Since the rookie minimum is the lowest salary, they basically have no impact on the cap until they get signed and until we reach the point that all 53 players on the roster count.

When people talk about a cap for picks, they're talking about a maximum dollar amount assigned to each team for signing their draft picks. Teams cannot exceed this amount. But that doesn't mean they aren't part of the same overall salary cap.

Clear as mud, right?

#37 Pimpdaddy

Pimpdaddy

    takin it as it comes

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,871 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:26 PM

...we have 5-7 btches on this team that don't conribute jack sht....gamble is one of them...we don't have that luxury especially if you want to get to the NFC championship...

#38 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

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

Posted 20 January 2013 - 07:40 PM

That is not correct. They are part of the same salary cap.

Here's how it works...draft picks are counted at the rookie minimum until they sign a contract. And for most of the offseason, only the top 51 players count against the cap. Since the rookie minimum is the lowest salary, they basically have no impact on the cap until they get signed and until we reach the point that all 53 players on the roster count.

When people talk about a cap for picks, they're talking about a maximum dollar amount assigned to each team for signing their draft picks. Teams cannot exceed this amount. But that doesn't mean they aren't part of the same overall salary cap.

Clear as mud, right?

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreet...p-really-work/.

#39 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,480 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 08:45 PM

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreet...p-really-work/.


Read it again. That article says exactly what I said above only in different words.

Specifically, signing bonuses for rookies once they sign their deal are treated exactly like any other player. In the case of draftees, their bonuses are spread over 4 years for purposes of the salary cap.

#40 CPF4LIFE

CPF4LIFE

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,784 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 09:50 PM

I call 'em like I see em. Sorry it doesn't fly with you ha. I know I'm not alone in my assessment of Gamble. Those stats can be skewed to by QB's who were attacking our other corners more, which probably was a good strategy. They also don't take into account crunch time plays, where Gamble is notably bad. Just off the top of my head like the NFC championship game against Seattle, or that game against Cincinnati where he got smoked by Chad Johnson when all he had to do was extend his hands to deflect or get the pick. Last year was a rebound year for him I will admit openly. But again, with his cap hit, how could he be kept anyway? And is he worth that kind of investment for one rebound year? I say no



You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

#41 Swaggasaurus

Swaggasaurus

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,754 posts
  • LocationWilkesboro

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:04 PM

You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.

#42 CPF4LIFE

CPF4LIFE

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,784 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:14 PM

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.


That exactly relates to what i said about him being cut because of cap issues.....come on man. And you cant be serious about that Thomas comment, i like the guy and he has upside but your jumping way over the gun with that statement. Lets not overly hype another player just to down Gamble please.

#43 ZB1224

ZB1224

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 715 posts
  • LocationWinston Salem

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:15 PM

I agree that cutting Gamble is probably the right thing to do, but let's not pretend that he was just another CB. I understand people's traditionalist way of thinking, but stats do not lie. I've said it time and time again... stats do not lie. They might not tell the complete truth, but they absolutely do not lie. Gamble has been a top 5-10 CB in the NFL the last couple of years.

#44 CPF4LIFE

CPF4LIFE

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,784 posts

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:19 PM

I agree that cutting Gamble is probably the right thing to do, but let's not pretend that he was just another CB. I understand people's traditionalist way of thinking, but stats do not lie. I've said it time and time again... stats do not lie. They might not tell the complete truth, but they absolutely do not lie. Gamble has been a top 5-10 CB in the NFL the last couple of years.



And he will be scooped by another team the day after he is cut or maybe even sooner. Cap issues just make him really hard to keep. Unfortunate.

#45 ThunderKatt

ThunderKatt

    Hello to All my Haters

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

Posted 20 January 2013 - 10:27 PM

Gamble will restructure unless another team comes along that he thinks gives him a better chance to win. That goes for all the guys you want to cut.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com