Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DaveThePanther2008

Our Cap Issues, Free Agency, Retaining Our Core

39 posts in this topic

As for restructuring, players aren't "throw(ing) away millions of dollars" - they're getting the salary they would have gotten sooner through a bonus and extending a few years out to knock the cap figure down.

That is not completely accurate. The future years of a players contract are not guaranteed. If their contract value in future years is now significantly out of whack with what the player would garner on the open market, then players will often restructure for less money in order to continue playing for their team.

For instance, we may value Beason higher than a team in FA would (given the injury). If we request to restructure his contract, the lower contract that we offer may be slightly higher than he would garner on the open market (but significantly less than the monster contract that he signed). In this case, restructuring would be for less money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not completely accurate. The future years of a players contract are not guaranteed. If their contract value in future years is now significantly out of whack with what the player would garner on the open market, then players will often restructure for less money in order to continue playing for their team.

For instance, we may value Beason higher than a team in FA would (given the injury). If we request to restructure his contract, the lower contract that we offer may be slightly higher than he would garner on the open market (but significantly less than the monster contract that he signed). In this case, restructuring would be for less money.

Yeah, you're right, I forgot about that. But it does make sense for players like Beason who would probably be paid a fraction of what he would earn even from a restructure with the Panthers on the open market. A MLB with a potentially bum achilles, knee, and shoulder, a guy who's played, what, 4.5 total games in the last two years, isn't going to garner much on the open market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any of these guys restructuring. Would you throw away millions of dollars because your employer asks you to?

A restructure doesn't "throw away millions". You get it NOW instead of later, and in the form of a guarantee up front. No risk of loosing unguaranteed money (salary) later on.

And BTW, you can't restructure in the last year of a contract. $5 mil = $5 mil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas Davis didn't loose money, they just put it behind multiple option bonueses each year. Players aren't going to take less money, might change the contract around a bit but thats it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For instance, we may value Beason higher than a team in FA would (given the injury). If we request to restructure his contract, the lower contract that we offer may be slightly higher than he would garner on the open market (but significantly less than the monster contract that he signed). In this case, restructuring would be for less money.

A Beason restruture still comes with HUGE risk and negative potential impact for a team already in the read for both 2013 and 2014.

They just need to part with him. Cut your losses. Take it on the chin. Not extend a potential problem with his history further. Beason isn't Smitty where we are putting all our hopes and dreams in one man at the position.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right, I forgot about that. But it does make sense for players like Beason who would probably be paid a fraction of what he would earn even from a restructure with the Panthers on the open market. A MLB with a potentially bum achilles, knee, and shoulder, a guy who's played, what, 4.5 total games in the last two years, isn't going to garner much on the open market.

I think that Beason and Gross would restructure. I also think Gamble coudl get a bigger contract on the open market than a sign reduced one from us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Beason restruture still comes with HUGE risk and negative potential impact for a team already in the read for both 2013 and 2014.

They just need to part with him. Cut your losses. Take it on the chin. Not extend a potential problem with his history further. Beason isn't Smitty where we are putting all our hopes and dreams in one man at the position.....

I am not advocating that we should keep him.

With Keek here, an injured Beason is not worth the cap space. I would let him go if he were not willing to play for significantly less....which I don't think he would.

Some very hard personnel decisions are ahead for the Panthers....and I foresee several Huddle meltdowns when they occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not advocating that we should keep him.

With Keek here, an injured Beason is not worth the cap space. I would let him go if he were not willing to play for significantly less....which I don't think he would.

Some very hard personnel decisions are ahead for the Panthers....and I foresee several Huddle meltdowns when they occur.

I think there will be a period here where the boards collective head explodes. I would guess close to half of Hurney's core as defined after 2010 will likely be gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any of these guys restructuring. Would you throw away millions of dollars because your employer asks you to?

Thomas Davis???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how long will it take for us to be out of these bad contracts? 2015???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites